PGJ vs. KSTR
PGJ (Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF) and KSTR (KraneShares SSE STAR Market 50 Index ETF) are both China Equities funds - PGJ tracks the Halter USX China Index while KSTR tracks the SSE Science and Technology Innovation Board 50 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, PGJ returned -13.64%/yr vs -0.21%/yr for KSTR. At a 0.45 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PGJ charges 0.70%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for KSTR.
Performance
PGJ vs. KSTR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PGJ achieves a -10.99% return, which is significantly lower than KSTR's 32.94% return.
PGJ
- 1D
- -2.45%
- 1M
- -3.45%
- YTD
- -10.99%
- 6M
- -12.93%
- 1Y
- -4.61%
- 3Y*
- 3.00%
- 5Y*
- -13.64%
- 10Y*
- 0.39%
KSTR
- 1D
- 1.39%
- 1M
- 7.01%
- YTD
- 32.94%
- 6M
- 38.23%
- 1Y
- 83.76%
- 3Y*
- 16.36%
- 5Y*
- -0.21%
- 10Y*
- —
PGJ vs. KSTR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PGJ Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF | -10.99% | 13.66% | 5.91% | -2.38% | -24.50% | -48.72% |
KSTR KraneShares SSE STAR Market 50 Index ETF | 32.94% | 42.82% | 6.12% | -17.93% | -38.51% | -1.70% |
Correlation
The correlation between PGJ and KSTR is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.46 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.51 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.44 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 28, 2021 | 0.45 |
The correlation between PGJ and KSTR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.44 to 0.51 - a consistent structural relationship.
PGJ vs. KSTR - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
PGJ
KSTR
Consumer Cyclical
Technology
Communication Services
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Industrials
Financial Services
-
Real Estate
-
Energy
Healthcare
Basic Materials
-
Utilities
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
PGJ
KSTR
Technology
PGJ
KSTR
Communication Services
PGJ
KSTR
-
Consumer Defensive
PGJ
KSTR
-
Industrials
PGJ
KSTR
Financial Services
PGJ
KSTR
-
Real Estate
PGJ
KSTR
-
Energy
PGJ
KSTR
Healthcare
PGJ
KSTR
Basic Materials
PGJ
-
KSTR
Utilities
PGJ
-
KSTR
-
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
PGJ vs. KSTR — Risk / Return Rank
PGJ
KSTR
PGJ vs. KSTR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ) and KraneShares SSE STAR Market 50 Index ETF (KSTR). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.
| PGJ | KSTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.56 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.12 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.99 | 1.40 | -0.41 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.18 | 4.76 | -4.94 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.34 | 12.06 | -12.41 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| PGJ | KSTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.19 | 2.37 | -2.56 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.31 | -0.01 | -0.31 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.01 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.12 | -0.00 | +0.12 |
Drawdowns
PGJ vs. KSTR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PGJ drawdown since its inception was -78.37%, which is greater than KSTR's maximum drawdown of -66.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PGJ and KSTR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PGJ | KSTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -78.37% | -66.46% | -11.91% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -25.69% | -17.70% | -7.99% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -30.82% | -41.55% | +10.73% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -70.00% | -66.46% | -3.54% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -78.37% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -66.07% | -10.98% | -55.09% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -31.74% | -38.77% | +7.03% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 13.40% | 6.97% | +6.43% |
Volatility
PGJ vs. KSTR - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ) is 8.55%, while KraneShares SSE STAR Market 50 Index ETF (KSTR) has a volatility of 15.14%. This indicates that PGJ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than KSTR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PGJ | KSTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.55% | 15.14% | -6.59% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 17.28% | 26.21% | -8.93% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 24.46% | 35.48% | -11.02% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 43.73% | 38.31% | +5.42% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 36.70% | 37.68% | -0.98% |
PGJ vs. KSTR - Expense Ratio Comparison
PGJ has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is lower than KSTR's 0.89% expense ratio.
Dividends
PGJ vs. KSTR - Dividend Comparison
PGJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.56%, while KSTR has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
KSTR KraneShares SSE STAR Market 50 Index ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
PGJ Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF | 3.56% | 3.38% | 4.70% | 2.50% | 0.84% | 0.00% | 0.30% | 0.17% | 0.31% | 2.05% | 1.94% | 0.37% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PGJ and KSTR have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
KSTR has higher volatility (15.14%) compared to PGJ (8.55%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PGJ dropped -78.37% vs KSTR's -66.46%.
On 5-year performance, KSTR leads with -0.21% vs -13.64% for PGJ. On fees, PGJ is cheaper at 0.70% per year. On volatility, PGJ has been the lower-risk option at 8.55%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, KSTR has performed better with a -0.21% return vs -13.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PGJ is cheaper with a 0.70% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for KSTR.
PGJ has the higher dividend yield at 3.56%, compared with 0.00% for KSTR.
PGJ tracks Halter USX China Index, while KSTR tracks SSE Science and Technology Innovation Board 50 Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and KraneShares. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for PGJ and 0.89% for KSTR.
KSTR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.37 vs -0.19), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for PGJ and KSTR
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer